What's Your 2011 Game of the Year?

[Eakin]

It's the end of the year, and that means it's time to look back on the last 12 months of gaming and arbitrarily select a single title that stood out among all the others.

For me, the best game I played this year was Portal 2. I didn't think they could top the first one but I'll be damned if the second one wasn't bigger, better, and all around hysterical. But then again I haven't played a lot of the AAA titles from November or December yet.

So what was your favorite game released this year?

[iyaerP]

Minecraft.

Although I suppose I am hardly the best judge since I have yet to play any of the big titles that have come out since about mid summer.:smalltongue:

[Zevox]

Drat, and here I just spent a fair amount of time typing up my own first post for just such a thread (favorite games of the year + most anticipated of next year actually, but close enough). Oh well, that does mean that I have a ready-made, fairly long post to paste in, it just may sound a tad awkward at a point or two where I was assuming I was making the first post. Here we go:


For myself, trying to pick out my top games of the year, what I've come up with is a simple five-game list:

1) Dragon Age 2
2) The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword
3) Batman: Arkham City
4) Catherine
5) Radiant Historia

Yes, that is Dragon Age 2 on top. Some of you will have expected that, since I've been defending the game in threads here over the course of the year, but I'll explain myself anyway. This'll be lengthy though, so I'll stick it in a spoiler.
I honestly consider DA2 Bioware's best game yet, with the caveat that certain missions of ME2 still take the award for their best writing. Aside from the too-numerous bugs that were present at release (but have since been patched out), the reuse of side-area maps (which was still done much better than in ME1 at least, and is likely a symptom of the game being rushed), and the odd difficulty curve (normal was too easy, hard could be pretty brutal at times - it's the first Bioware game I've played where there doesn't seem to be a "just right" difficulty setting for me), I have no significant complaints and much praise for the game.

Combat-wise it significantly improved on its predecessor with the revamped talent system, giving a much wider variety of useful options for character customization, especially for Rogues. It did away with some of the worst fundamental imbalances of DA:O (mages being godlike, two-weapon fighting far outdoing any other physical combat style, two-handed weapons and archery being weak for most of the game), gave each combat style its own unique identity (two handed weapons = melee AoE, two-weapon fighting = close-range glass cannon, archery = slow shooting but extremely high damage per shot), gave you a ton of options for abilities to take beyond just filling out your weapon and specialization talents, and the addition of cross-class combos added an extra set of potent options to explore.

Story-wise (huge spoilers follow, incidentally) I was very pleased that Bioware chose to put a lot of focus on the most interesting and potentially controversial aspect of the Dragon Age setting, the treatment of mages. That was something I formed rather strong opinions about pretty quickly playing DA:O (no doubt in part because my first character was a mage), and I am very happy to be able to do something about it in DA2, and hope to do more in DA3. And even much of the rest of it I found very effective - the Qunari got quite a lot of strong reactions out of me, more so even than Sten inspired in DA:O, and taking down the Arishok in single combat was quite satisfying (if admittedly a little more drawn-out than I'd have preferred). Your mother's death was sufficiently shocking that even a mage-player had a plausible excuse to end up supporting the Templars after that, even though I personally never would. The artifact from the Deep Roads provides a tantalizing new bit of lore, and though I do wish it had been more fully explored, I expect that it will be either in DLC or a future game, since Meredith's statue isn't exactly likely to just sit there untouched forever. And Anders' development, while making him a less enjoyable character as a companion than he was in Awakening, is well-done and makes for a potent climax to the story, impressively taking things to a level that even I can't support even though I fully understand and sympathize with his motives.

I could go on, but I think I've said enough given I have other games to talk about.

Skyward Sword is one that honestly does give DA2 a run for its money for that top slot. It's simply a masterpiece of a Zelda game, with some of the best bosses in the entire series, inventive and enjoyable dungeons, the best use of the Wii's motion controls ever (seriously, it's a terrible pity that it took until the end of the Wii's life to get a game like this), a suitably epic-scale story providing the backdrops to the adventure, new additions like the ability to upgrade most of your equipment, and a pretty darn good length and difficulty for a Zelda game. Plus with Hero Mode increasing the difficulty significantly (you take double damage and get no random heart drops or heart flowers), my one big complaint from Twilight Princess is gone. While Skyward Sword doesn't have any characters I liked as much as Midna, it is still a better game than Twilight Princess I think, and as such it is a strong contender for best Zelda game ever. I've long held Ocarina of Time to be one of the best games ever, and until now only Twilight Princess has ever come close to dethroning it as my favorite Zelda game. Skyward Sword may just have done it though. I think I'll have to finish it on Hero Mode before I'm sure, but it just might have done it.

For the rest, I'll try to be briefer. I am a little uncertain of the placement for the other three, mostly because of Catherine. It's not the type of game that I normally like, and I do have my criticisms of parts of how it played out in the end, but I still find myself enjoying it quite a bit. The puzzle gameplay was surprisingly fun, much more so than any puzzle game I've ever played, and aside from the previously-mentioned criticisms that I won't go into in detail just now I did enjoy the story. Which leaves me kind of confused on how to rank it relative to my other two on the list, which are more the kind of thing I'm accustomed to enjoying. Arkham City is just a great action/adventure game, and while Zelda is still king of that genre, I have to give it a lot of credit - even someone who doesn't like Batman, such as myself, can enjoy the hell out of that game, with it's great combat, good stealth, and some excellent boss fights. Radiant Historia meanwhile is a fantastic Atlus RPG, with a unique battle system, well-told and fascinating story, and inventive use of the time-travel theme it focuses on for both the story and combat (although the logic does get stretched pretty thin in some areas, specifically when actions in one timeline impact the other for no readily apparent reason). It would probably be higher on the list if the characters had stood out more - don't get me wrong, many of them are good, just not great - and the ending had a little more impact. In that sense it does feel like it fell a bit short of its potential, but it's still one of the best, and a good title to be among those sending off the DS.

For reference, games that are popularly considered contenders for best of the year that aren't on my list are almost surely because I haven't played them, which in turn is usually because I don't want to. This is true for everything from Skyrim to LA Noire. For different reasons they just don't appeal to me, and obviously if I don't expect to enjoy them, I'm not going to play them. About the only one I do intend to play is Portal 2, and I just haven't gotten around to that yet because I simply wasn't such a big fan of the first Portal that I feel any pressing need to play its sequel. Which does make it kind of unlikely that it'd crack my top 5 of the year, given I've never understood why the first Portal game got as much praise as it did - it was good, but I didn't think it was nearly as good as many of its fans seem to.

I should also add that Ultimate Marvel vs Capcom 3 and its vanilla predecessor would be runners-up for me. They've actually probably provided me with more hours of entertainment than any other game this year except maybe Dragon Age 2 (I haven't stopped playing Ultimate daily since it came out a month ago), I just don't quite like fighting games enough to put them up there with the games I listed.

[Since it's not actually part of the intended topic here, I'll spoiler the part of my post talking about anticipated games of next year.]
And for the second part of the topic, most anticipated games of 2012, here's another list:

1) Tales of Graces F
2) Mass Effect 3
3) Shin Megami Tensei: Devil Survivor 2
4) Xenoblade Chronicles
5) Kid Icarus: Uprising
6) Dragon's Dogma
7) Persona 4: The Ultimate in Mayonaku Arena
8) Asura's Wrath

There's two real doozies for me next year: Mass Effect 3 and Tales of Graces F, sequels to some of my favorite games of all time - short of Persona 5 you'd be hard-pressed to find any game I'd be looking forward to more than those. Heck, Tales of Graces F is going to sell me a PS3. And of course they both have to come out around the same time. ME3 releases the first week of March, and Tales of Graces F is coming sometime in March (specific date not yet announced, just the month). Those two alone will likely fill up most of my free time for March and possibly also April - which means it's bad news for me that pretty much all of the games on that list come out around the same time. Yeah, Asura's Wrath and Devil Survivor 2 arrive a week before ME3, Dragon's Dogma and Kid Icarus arrive on the same day in late March, and Xenoblade Chronicles arrives sometime early in the year but hasn't been specified when yet (I'm hoping at least mid-April, as my wallet is already going to hate me in March). I'll probably wind up skipping Asura's Wrath until I'm caught up on the rest, because I know that if I picked it up on day 1 and couldn't finish it in a week, I'd drop it immediately when ME3 came out.

The only game on that list that isn't coming out in that general timeframe is Persona 4: The Ultimate in Mayonaku Arena. I'm still half shocked that one exists at all, as I'd never have expected a Persona 4 fighting game to be made, but hell, it combines my favorite games ever (yes, games plural - three characters from Persona 3 will be playable in it) with a genre that I've grown to enjoy and respect a lot more over the last year and a half, so I'm completely down for it. That one doesn't have any concrete release date yet, just that it should come out next year in Japan, so I'm hoping we'll see it in NA late next year or at worst early 2013.

That pretty much taps out games that I know I'm looking forward to next year though. Everything else I know of releasing in 2012 I'm more iffy on, such as the new "DmC" title or the "Extended" release of BlazBlue: Continuum Shift, or are titles that I'd guess may come out next year but don't have announced dates yet, such as the Paper Mario game for the 3DS or Dragon Quest 10 on the Wii and Wii U. So, yeah, there's actually a chance that every new game I'll buy next year will be out by April, depending on what gets announced for later in the year and what will be waiting for 2013. That'd be a first.
Zevox

[arguskos]

So far, probably Deus Ex: Human Revolution. I haven't completed it yet, and I've heard... not so amazing things about the ending, but the gameplay is stellar, the graphics are solid, the writing's pretty good, and I'm just enjoying it. I think I'm hardwired to enjoy this kinda crap though, so it might just be that.

Also, I haven't played AC: Revelations yet, so that might be better (I'm definitely hardwired to enjoy parkour combat stuff), not sure yet.

[Dublock]

So far, probably Deus Ex: Human Revolution. I haven't completed it yet, and I've heard... not so amazing things about the ending, but the gameplay is stellar, the graphics are solid, the writing's pretty good, and I'm just enjoying it. I think I'm hardwired to enjoy this kinda crap though, so it might just be that.

Having loved the first Deus Ex game and this one, I do agree it is a great game with a horrible, horrible ending, but for me I would not list it as a game of the year list (at least for me).

I have to add Skyrim to your list. I have just finished for the night playing that game, I am on my first play-through and I have been playing for about 50 hours and I know I got at least 10-20 left if not more on my only character (I think I can reach close 70s to 80s without stretching) and for me, how long a game holds my attention is one of the biggest criteria for game of the year, as it combines game play, story, characters, value of my money, and how long it keeps me interested. Not to mention the mods that will come out for it will be glorious and yes I have it for the pc.

I understand your love for DA2, having played through it and it was a great game but I wouldn't put it over Skyrim to be honest.

For the other games: The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword, I have yet to get the money (poor college kid), I did not really enjoy the first one so Batman: Arkham City holds little interest, although I did watch my roomate play some of it, and I need to check into Catherine and Radiant Historia. Portal 2 was a great game and I did enjoy it, but I personally would not vote for it to be the game of the year.

*looks through a list of video game releases of this year for reference* Dead Space 2, The Witcher 2, Battlefield 3, Pokemon Black and White, and CoDMW3 are the ones I found that deserves mentioning. As much I dislike MW3 series, publisher, and such the fact that it sells that many makes an impact. I really enjoyed BF3, and I have been a huge Pokemon fan since the cards first came out years ago (switched to the games when Silver came out). But I can't vote for any game I listed in this paragraph for the overall award, just honorable mention.

Yup, I personally vote for Skyrim, despite myself not finishing it yet (I will this week...at least the main story line :P)

(sorry if I rambled a bit to much)

[Dumbledore lives]

I have played very few games released this year, for any number of reasons but mainly lack of funds, and I'd say my favorite game might be Terraria, at least it is the one which I've spent the most time with recently. Once I've played some others like AC: Revelations and Arkham City it might be ousted, but honestly it is everything Minecraft wants to be now.

[Zevox]

I have to add Skyrim to your list. I have just finished for the night playing that game, I am on my first play-through and I have been playing for about 50 hours and I know I got at least 10-20 left if not more on my only character (I think I can reach close 70s to 80s without stretching) and for me, how long a game holds my attention is one of the biggest criteria for game of the year, as it combines game play, story, characters, value of my money, and how long it keeps me interested. Not to mention the mods that will come out for it will be glorious and yes I have it for the pc.
Since you seem to be addressing this to me in spite of quoting someone else before it, I suppose I should reply. For me, Skyrim holds no interest. It's a combination of factors, as it does pretty much everything I don't want an RPG to do, but the straw that breaks the camel's back is the first-person gameplay mechanics. I do not like those, at all. I don't like first-person shooters, and I honestly think that first-person mechanics are even worse for melee than for shooting. I've played Bethesda games before - I actually spent a great deal of time on Fallout 3 - and that's probably the single biggest thing preventing me from enjoying them. All of the other things I don't like, such as the sandbox-style world and all the game design philosophy that seems to go with it, or the unimpressive writing, I could put up with to at least give the game a shot, if I could expect to at least enjoy the combat. But I can't, so as far as I'm concerned, Skyrim, and every other similar Bethesda game, is not worth my money.

Personally, if I were judging just by time spent on the game, DA2 would likely come out in first easily for me. I've played through it three times, each file being 40+ hours (more for the first time through obviously), and played through all the DLC for it once. As I mentioned in my first post, the only game(s) that could possibly rival that are (Ultimate) Marvel vs Capcom 3, because I have played a hell of a lot of those online. A friend of mine often plays me for two to four hours a night whenever we can get a chance to play (which isn't that often due to his very busy schedule, but still). That's by far the most multiplayer I've every played of anything. Still, like I said, I can't bring myself to rate fighting games over good RPGs like DA2 and Radiant Historia, good action-adventure games like Skyward Sword and Arkham City, or the unusual excellence of Catherine, so they'll just have to settle for runner-up mentions.

Zevox

[warty goblin]

Saint's Row III tops my list without a doubt. The unfortunate thing is that it's inferior to Saint's Row II in a lot of ways. However the moment to moment shooting, driving, running and general mayhem causing plays extremely well, and the story is, although patchier than SRII, still quite good. Volition definitely know how to write dialog that's witty without sounding fake, and in general they do a good job of tying plot development to character - both protagonist and antagonist - actions. Watching them do it, it's kind of depressing how few other companies do stories like that.

Second place is obviously the Witcher II. After being patched over the course of the summer and early autumn it's quite the thing now, and I look forwards to digging in and finishing it after Christmas break. Honestly I'd love to wrap it up over Christmas, but I'll be fifteen hundred miles away from my computer, so...

Third place goes to Anno 2070. I need to spend a lot more time with this little beauty to be sure, but signs are positive I've finally found a city builder that's as much fun as I remember having with the old Impressions games. Importantly its mechanically different from those games, but without feeling strange, awkward, or artificial in doing so. It's gentle, beautiful with an appealing fiction underpinning the actually interesting choices to be made, and makes it fun to build lots of pretty towns. Really, this is all I ask for in a city builder.

Fourth goes to Crysis II. It's not as good as the first half of Crysis, but it's never as bad as the second half of its predecessor. The RPG mechanics are mostly pointless, but the nanosuit's easier to control, the shooting is still wonderfully precise, and I enjoyed it thoroughly right up through the end - dampened only slightly by not having the least idea what the sodding hell the story had been about.

Fifth is probably Two Worlds II. Weirdly it ended up being everything I hoped Skyrim would be, which is to say fun. I like medieval European fantasy as much - probably more - than the next person, but it was awful nice to go someplace different for a change. The combat was nice, brutal, and in a nice change from the endless goddamn dodge-rolling, based heavily on blocking. The story was there without getting in the way, and some of the quests were genuinely interesting. And if nothing else, any game that attacks the player with dung-flinging baboons deserves some sort of recognition.

Honorable Mentions: Might and Magic: Heroes VI for general enjoyableness, Operation Flashpoint: Red River for putting RPG mechanics in a shooter in a fun and non-annoying way and also being a pretty good shooter about commanding a fireteam, Duke Nukem Forever for making me laugh.

[Starwulf]

Since I'm pretty poor, and this year has been one unexpected hit on the wallet after another(Car broke down TWICE), as well as a planned trip to Chi-Town to be a groomsmen in a buddies wedding, this list is going to be extremely short:

1. Skyrim: Admittedly, this game would be at the top of my list even if I had played every single game released this year. For every reason Zevox dislikes it, I like it: Open World Sandbox gameplay style has always appealed to me(and has since Arena, but most noticeably Daggerfall, greatest TES gamer ever), First Person Melee Combat(I've always been of the opinion that Third-person melee combat is very awkward to watch and control.). Granted, Bethsofts writers could use a few tips from Bioware(hell, EVERY COMPANY could use some story-writing tips from Bioware, but hey, that's their thing), but I've still always found their side-quests to be quite well written(for some reason, their MQs have always been a bit on the poor side it seems, while non-MQ stuff is pretty damn good).

2. (And Shout out to Zevox for mentioning this, or I'd have forgotten it) Catherine: An excellent puzzle game that I'm currently trying to find a good deal on on E-bay to buy my wife. I've played it over a friends house and absolutely fell in love with this gem. It's like playing an interactive Anime during the daytime, and the puzzle elements at night are quite entertaining, albeit a bit stressful at times, lol. I haven't completed it, so I'm assuming I didn't get to the part that Zevox disagrees with, but if the puzzles remain fun, and the story at least half as good as it starts out as, It's more then deserving of being nominated for a GOTY mention.

Games that I WISH I could have played this year: Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword, Dark Souls, Radiant Historia(I have heard so much good about this game, just can't afford to buy it, but man I'd love to get my hands on a copy). Two Worlds 2, and last but not least, Heroes VI(despite my dislikes of the changes made to the resource collection, and a few others, It's still Heroes, and I've been playing Heroes since the release date of the very first Heroes game, every last one of them are sitting on a shelf underneath my desk, stacked up on each other in original boxes and inserts).

Games that I"m looking forward to next year: Kingdoms of Amalaur:Reckoning, and Diablo 3. Can't really think of any others at this moment, but those two alone will keep me happy for the entire year I'm happy.

[Crossblade]

Sadly, Halo: Reach. Yes, I know it came out in 2010, but I played it non-stop. I enjoyed the Daily challenges, it was enough to keep you playing, but only for about 1-3 hours a day, then I could do other things; which is a respectable, responsible way to game.

There are only 2 other games that pulled me away from Reach:

Dragon Age: Ultimate Edition, which also game out in 2010. (first play through was non-stop, was very happy about it coming with all DLC; I'm praying they do the same for DA:2, I'm waiting to buy it incase they do that for it)

and

Arkham City, which did come out this year. Good story, but I found there wasn't as much sneaking as Asylum. I love my sneaking, which Reach let you be stealthy in its campaign. Combat seemed to be more successful when I button mashed X and Y as opposed to using my gadgets though. Beat the game at 60%, but once the story ended, I played for about half an hour more and got to 64% collecting Riddler trophies and haven't touched the game in over a week. (bought it 3 weeks ago at half price at walmart)
My girlfriends regrets my buying it, as for a week straight, the amount I claimed to be Batman, in a raspy voice increased exponentially.
I'M BATMAN. :smallmad:

Minecraft is also on my list, and much love goes to fellow playgrounder Iskandar for buying it for me (won it while watching his Let's Play). My current computer sadly cannot handle multiplayer servers, due to only having 1 processor core, but runs single player beautifully (minor lag when it rains though).


I already know that Mass Effect 3 will be my 2012 game of the year due to the anticipated story conclusion and included firefight-like multiplayer game play. I'm going to have more friends than 1 game will allow in.

Edit: And I'll put Skyrim on my wishlist for games I wish I had in 2011. Did not get it as I'm saving money for a new computer for myself as a Christmas present to myself. My current computer couldn't run Skyrim, and my tv isn't an HDTV, so playing on my 360 -I've heard- is undesirable due to screen cut offs. I own Morrowind, but never even came close to beating it; explored the west coast and once accidently wondered into the centre-ish area, that was it. I've had to resort to watching a Let's Play on Youtube for my want of Skyrim (only decent non-nord LP I found was by Snapwave, who plays an Orc)

[Ogremindes]

Since Minecraft's official release was in November, it'd have to be that.

[Rustic Dude]

First has to be the Witcher 2 for being the best all around game I've ever played.

Second has to be Saints Row 3 because there is no better game in the "be a jackass, terrorize people" business.

Third for Minecraft. It could be the first, but I see the official release as a mere formality and I don't really consider it a 2011 game.

[warty goblin]

Since you seem to be addressing this to me in spite of quoting someone else before it, I suppose I should reply. For me, Skyrim holds no interest. It's a combination of factors, as it does pretty much everything I don't want an RPG to do, but the straw that breaks the camel's back is the first-person gameplay mechanics. I do not like those, at all. I don't like first-person shooters, and I honestly think that first-person mechanics are even worse for melee than for shooting. I've played Bethesda games before - I actually spent a great deal of time on Fallout 3 - and that's probably the single biggest thing preventing me from enjoying them. All of the other things I don't like, such as the sandbox-style world and all the game design philosophy that seems to go with it, or the unimpressive writing, I could put up with to at least give the game a shot, if I could expect to at least enjoy the combat. But I can't, so as far as I'm concerned, Skyrim, and every other similar Bethesda game, is not worth my money.

While I found Skyrim to be quite underwhelming, it is very playable in third person. Not just in the third person is there sort of way that Fallout 3 and Oblivion were, but actually functional. In fact the default FoV is so bloody narrow in a lot of ways its preferable. It probably wouldn't work so hot for archery, but I found it quite acceptable for melee.

[Dogmantra]

Absolutely 100% Bloodline Champions.

It officially came out this year and was the best multiplayer game I have ever played, and one of the best games I've ever played. Alas, the 14th of September patch changed a lot of things for the worse, and took the game in a direction that I don't particularly agree with. That said, it gave me incredible entertainment and was well worth the money I spent on it while I played.

Alchemist is my soul mate. Forever and always.

[Grif]

I wanted to say Hat Fortress 2 for continuing to entertain me, but alas, it is not made this year. Also since I am quite poor, I did not play any of the supposed big hits this year. (Skyrim, Arkham City, DA2, AC, etc.)

Instead, I shall just put in Bastion in line for an honourable mention. A perfect blend of hack-n-slash, RPG-lite elements, incredible storytelling and soundtracks. It is the standard every indie games should live up to.

[AtlanteanTroll]

Pokemon Black and White. Because it's Pokemon. :smalltongue: (Also for bringing new blood and new life to the series.)

[Zevox]

While I found Skyrim to be quite underwhelming, it is very playable in third person. Not just in the third person is there sort of way that Fallout 3 and Oblivion were, but actually functional. In fact the default FoV is so bloody narrow in a lot of ways its preferable. It probably wouldn't work so hot for archery, but I found it quite acceptable for melee.
Yeah, I already checked up on that, both via watching youtube videos and by talking to my brother and a friend who have the game about it. It doesn't fix my complaints at all - it's still just first-person gameplay mechanics with a zoomed-out perspective. I don't like the first-person point-of-view, true, but that's only part of the problem, and as long as the gameplay mechanics associated with that perspective remain the same, I remain uninterested.

Zevox

[warty goblin]

Yeah, I already checked up on that, both via watching youtube videos and by talking to my brother and a friend who have the game about it. It doesn't fix my complaints at all - it's still just first-person gameplay mechanics with a zoomed-out perspective. I don't like the first-person point-of-view, true, but that's only part of the problem, and as long as the gameplay mechanics associated with that perspective remain the same, I remain uninterested.

Zevox

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by first person mechanics here. Zoomed out Skyrim plays more or less like quite a number of other third person melee games; you press attack, your dude attacks and if there's an enemy in the path of your swing, you hit. There's no lock-on or anything like that, but that's true of plenty of third person games. Actually playing it with a controller to me it doesn't feel remarkably different than most other third person games. A bit kludgier perhaps, but not hugely so.

Like I said I can imagine it being a bit rocky for archery, but I found archery rather rocky in first person, so it's not like you'd be missing much. Not that I'm saying go out and get the game, it didn't exactly cause me to jump over the moon with joy.

[Zevox]

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by first person mechanics here. Zoomed out Skyrim plays more or less like quite a number of other third person melee games; you press attack, your dude attacks and if there's an enemy in the path of your swing, you hit. There's no lock-on or anything like that, but that's true of plenty of third person games. Actually playing it with a controller to me it doesn't feel remarkably different than most other third person games. A bit kludgier perhaps, but not hugely so.

Like I said I can imagine it being a bit rocky for archery, but I found archery rather rocky in first person, so it's not like you'd be missing much. Not that I'm saying go out and get the game, it didn't exactly cause me to jump over the moon with joy.
For one thing, you still aim the same way as in first-person: the camera and the direction your character is looking are locked together, and your target, or items you want to pick up, etc have to be in the center. That is one of the aspects of first-person gameplay mechanics that I particularly dislike.

The other big one is that, from what I've seen on youtube and heard from my brother and friend, what you said about "if there's an enemy in the path of your swing" still isn't true. As with all first-person games, the actual hitbox of the melee attack has nothing to do with the animation, and is instead just a general area in front of you. Which makes it impossible to determine your reach visually, forcing you to simply get in close, keep the camera pointed at the target, and wail away. Again, I do not like this, and find it makes the combat extremely clunky and unenjoyable.

Zevox

[warty goblin]

For one thing, you still aim the same way as in first-person: the camera and the direction your character is looking are locked together, and your target, or items you want to pick up, etc have to be in the center. That is one of the aspects of first-person gameplay mechanics that I particularly dislike.
That's true of a lot of games, not just those that can be played in first person.


The other big one is that, from what I've seen on youtube and heard from my brother and friend, what you said about "if there's an enemy in the path of your swing" still isn't true. As with all first-person games, the actual hitbox of the melee attack has nothing to do with the animation, and is instead just a general area in front of you. Which makes it impossible to determine your reach visually, forcing you to simply get in close, keep the camera pointed at the target, and wail away. Again, I do not like this, and find it makes the combat extremely clunky and unenjoyable.

Zevox

Most of the attack animations are right-left or left-right swings, the area covered by the animation pretty much is just a swath in front of you. Judging reach isn't hard, the range of the attack does seem to tie in pretty well with the reach of the animation. It's not perfect, but it's not like most games do per-pixel hit detection for melee attacks anyways, regardless of their camera perspective. All in all I found the melee to be improved from Oblivion in some ways, but still not particularly great. It lacked Mount and Blade's careful timing and maneuvre, or Dark Messiah's precision violence, which left it just a bit clumsy feeling.

Just started my second Saint's Row III playthrough, which is going on three-week hold since I'm flying home tomorrow. Still definitely game of the year, nothing else is so consistently enjoyable.

[Zevox]

That's true of a lot of games, not just those that can be played in first person.
Not in my experience. Certainly not the "targets/things you want to pick up need to be in the center of the screen part," which is definitely solely a first-person thing, and I can't think of any non-first-person games off the top of my head where the direction the character is facing and the camera are locked together either, though I suppose that is more conceivable. Still, cameras that operate independently of the character's facing have been around basically as long as 3D games have, as I know that even Mario 64 had basic camera controls in it.


Most of the attack animations are right-left or left-right swings, the area covered by the animation pretty much is just a swath in front of you. Judging reach isn't hard, the range of the attack does seem to tie in pretty well with the reach of the animation. It's not perfect, but it's not like most games do per-pixel hit detection for melee attacks anyways, regardless of their camera perspective.
That's certainly not my experience either. I've never encountered a first-person game where judging the reach of your melee attacks visually was possible, and have been told that Skyrim is no different; meanwhile most action-oriented games I've played do have hitboxes correspond pretty much exactly to attack animations. Perhaps it's simply the different types of games we're accustomed to playing, being as I usually play console titles while you're a PC-only gamer.

Zevox

[Cristo Meyers]

I think I've only played four games that were released this year...just about everything else has come from years past.

Lesse: Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Catherine, Dragon Age 2, Saint's Row 3...yeah, that's all I can think of.

Deus Ex was consistently fun, but the ending was a major let down. I can understand why they did it that way, but that doesn't help.

Catherine I'm enjoying a lot, but I had to put it down for a while after hitting a major wall known as "The Third Level of the Clock Tower" I'll pick it up again later, no doubt. This was the game that was the last straw and finally made me get a PS3.

Dragon Age 2 I enjoyed greatly, but it's sitting gathering dust now. Just can't work up the enthusiasm to play it. Haven't even played the Mark of the Assassin DLC yet.

Saint's Row 3 is very fun, but my experience is tarnished by the fact that I also acquired Saint's Row 2 this year. 3 is fun, no doubt, but in my opinion 2 is better.

If I had to pick one, it'd be Dragon Age 2 just for sheer amount of play time. But none of them are on the same level as the games I'm playing now like Red Dead Redemption, so it's kind of a half-hearted pick.

[dgnslyr]

Final Fantasy Tactics. Yes, I know it's a pretty old game, but I always seem to show up at the party late, so there you go. The spritework is amazingly detailed, the plot is phenomenal, the soundtrack is excellent, and the gameplay is unique. Also, it's hard to beat becoming the Fist of the North Sky and punching out notJesus.

[Pronounceable]

If you're a Bats fan Arkham City is the perfect game. If you're not a Bats fan, it has the best and most entertaining dude punching mechanics ever. But I wouldn't call it game of the year. Nope. It's the game of the decade. Only the heaviest of heavyweights of old such as Doom and Civilization and Baldur's Gate prevents it from being the best game ever.

Obviously if you're the sort of gamer who doesn't like punching large numbers of dudes in the face you'll disagree with me. But being that sort of gamer automatically disqualifies you from having a valid opinion on the matter.

[MachineWraith]

1. Skyrim
2. Battlefield 3
3. Warhammer 40k: Space Marine

In that, order, too, I think. I've already spent way too much time playing Skyrim; The game just sunk its claws into me and hasn't let go. I've got 3 characters so far, encompassing the 3 basic class types: Argonian warrior, Dunmer thief, and Breton mage. The playstyles and gear selections for each are different enough that the game remains interesting even if I'm going through content I've already done, but the game is also large enough that running into the same content isn't really an issue.

My friends, girlfriend and I all play Battlefield 3 together online, and my selection of it as a contender for my Game of the Year is based solely on its multiplayer component. I literally haven't even put the singleplayer disc in my Xbox yet. Great fun, when I'm not lagging :smallmad:.

And I had loads of fun with Space Marine. I've loved the 40k universe since I first laid eyes on it, and no game I've played to date has made me feel more a part of that universe than Space Marine. I also enjoyed the multiplayer aspect; Trying all the different loadout possibilities to see what worked best was fun, and my friends all had different tastes, so we ended up running a pretty well-balanced team.

[JabberwockySupafly]

Dark Souls, for being difficult without being unfair & finally giving me a challenge that rivals it's spiritual predecessor, Demon's Souls (and the King's Field series before it). If you die, it's your own damn fault. Can't blame shoddy mechanics or "cheating AI". There is only one time in the entire game where you actually have to die, and that's to progress the story.

Also, it's a beautiful game (except for the PC facial models, but well, you're wearing a helm most of the time anyways) with expertly crafted gameplay and more than enough secrets and "side quest" content to keep me and many others occupied. It's the first game where I felt like buying the strategy guide not out of necessity, but out of the sheer fact I wanted to make sure I saw every last thing there is to see in this game.

[Brumski]

Dark Souls and Terraria ate up many of my weekends this year.

[Siosilvar]

I finally finished Mass Effect 2. Does that count?

[Callos_DeTerran]

My game of the year?

Hmmm...

First is, without a doubt Saints Row the Third. Sure, there's been other games that came out that had better stories and such (though Saints Row 3's story wasn't /bad/ either), but none of the ones I played where anywhere near as much fun as Saints Row the Third. Was 2 better?...Ehhh...in certain aspects, but the Third is better in others.

Second would be Arkham City, I loved it because I felt like Batman (again), the story was engaging and surprising, and the game itself was challenging without being too difficult to enjoy.

Third would probably be...Catherine I suppose. I still haven't finished it, but I was enjoying it immensely while I was playing it and I still want to finish it, which is more then I can say for Fallout: New Vegas (or any Bethesda game really), Deus Ex: Human Revolution, or other big-name titles I played.

Sadly, as much as I might want to, I can't play Skyward Sword. I have a wee, but I'm not comfortable with the Wii remote controls, I like controllers more. If I could play it, it'd probably be on this list though, even if I doubt it could trump Twilight Princess as the best Zelda game.

[Cristo Meyers]

Sadly, as much as I might want to, I can't play Skyward Sword. I have a wee, but I'm not comfortable with the Wii remote controls, I like controllers more. If I could play it, it'd probably be on this list though, even if I doubt it could trump Twilight Princess as the best Zelda game.

You and me both. Once I heard that Skyward Sword was using the motion controls rather than just pushing a button it dropped right off my list. I have yet to have a good experience with a game that uses those controls to that extent. No More Heroes is the only game I've played thus far that used them well and in a way that didn't actually hinder my playing the game.

[RPharazon]

Kerbal Space Program.

Because there's nothing better than landing on the Mun with only a basic understanding of orbital mechanics, entirely too many explosive things strapped to your spaceship, eyeballing everything you do, actually landing on the Mun, and having your rocket explode for no good reason, stranding your poor Kerbalnauts on the Mun. Forever.

Like so. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIv47m6kjjY)

It's the only game that's consistently drawn me back to it throughout the year.

Plus it's constantly updated and there are a bajillion mods and parts for it. Although now it's a paid program. Before and including 0.13, it was free. Now it's $7!

[Giggling Ghast]

Dragon Age 2, despite its faults.

[JadedDM]

Wow, not a great gaming year for me. I had to look up what games came out in 2011. I've only played three.

I own Back to the Future the Game on PC.

My roommate bought Dragon Age II and I played it. Thought it was terrible.

I played a little Skyrim when I visited my sister for Thanksgiving.

That's it. So I guess of those three, I gotta pick Skyrim. As I said, I hated Dragon Age II. And while BttF is a great trip through nostalgia, it's not much of a game...more like an interactive film.

[Lord Raziere]

Dragon Age 2.

[James the Dark]

Minecraft, but a very particular flavor of Minecraft; Modded minecraft. While the initial game ate a lot of my time last year, it wasn't until I was brought into the fold on the mods Industrialcraft and Buildcraft that a spark really went off in my heart. I lost weeks -- weeks! -- building automated production factories and exploring the Redpower marble caves and volcanoes. If you've ever played IC2, then you'll know how labor intensive it was to create solar panels? I had a Buildcraft machine which did it automatically. Insert iron, stone, et al, recieve solar panels. Effortless, elegant, sweeeet.

After that, yeah, Skyrim. I held off playing it because I hated the hell out of certain aspects of Oblivion. But good things kept being said about Skyrim, so I broke down and tried it. And they'd taken everything I hated about Oblivion and garbaged them. If it had been that alone, I would have loved this game. Add the crafting system (I use only the gear I've built and enchanted myself, thank you), the vast world, and the constant pay-off for persnickety exploring, and you've got a happy consumer.

After that comes Deus Ex. At some point I do have to get back to it, but at the moment, Skyrim and My Machines call to me...

[Karoht]

Portal 2, hands down. It did the same thing Portal 1 did to me. I was imagining all kinds of puzzles, and I was left questioning everything. Everything.

[psilontech]

Pretty much a three-way tie because I don't feel like sorting them out. They are all good games for very different reasons.

Deus Ex: Human Revolution
Dark Souls
Portal 2

[GloatingSwine]

Bastion.

Whilst the gameplay itself was relatively simple, there was a good deal of content for a downloadable game, the visual design was beautiful, the soundtrack was superb (So much so that I bought a copy for more than the price of the original game), and the sharp observations of the in-game narrator put the cherry on top. All of this contributed to a fantastic and haunting atmosphere that made the game compelling beyond any single element.

It's not a big shiny AAA title, but it was the most complete and satisfying game I played this year.

[GloatingSwine]

That's true of a lot of games, not just those that can be played in first person.


But not, generally, of those focused on melee combat. Go and play a Ninja Gaiden game, or Bayonetta, or Devil May Cry, and see how third person melee actually works.

The fact that it uses steering controls and target item under cursor rather than directional control and target item at feet in third person is the greatest indicator that the third person mode is still just a bolt-on useful for vanity shots and little else in Skyrim.

[Starwulf]

But not, generally, of those focused on melee combat. Go and play a Ninja Gaiden game, or Bayonetta, or Devil May Cry, and see how third person melee actually works.

The fact that it uses steering controls and target item under cursor rather than directional control and target item at feet in third person is the greatest indicator that the third person mode is still just a bolt-on useful for vanity shots and little else in Skyrim.

That's likely all it will ever be in TES game to be honest. I don't even blame them a tiny bit for not adding more functionality to third-person mode, especially in the way you referring to. TES games are MASSIVE. Many times larger then most games in terms of areas to explore and land to travel, so to try to make the game fully playable in TWO different point of views that are complete opposites would probably add an extra year or more onto the games release schedule, and that's really not worth the several extra hundred thousand or so gamers they might attract with that.

[Zevox]

That's likely all it will ever be in TES game to be honest. I don't even blame them a tiny bit for not adding more functionality to third-person mode, especially in the way you referring to. TES games are MASSIVE. Many times larger then most games in terms of areas to explore and land to travel, so to try to make the game fully playable in TWO different point of views that are complete opposites would probably add an extra year or more onto the games release schedule, and that's really not worth the several extra hundred thousand or so gamers they might attract with that.
And that's their decision to make. Personally though as long as that's their decision, I don't believe I'll be trying their games anymore. That on top of the sandbox design and so on that I already don't like just kills any chance I can see of me enjoying their games much.

Zevox

[Mutant Sheep]

I feel so out of place saying Gears of War 3. But I'm saying it anyway. Horde Mode is even better, campaign is amazing, and Beast Mode is just beast.:smalltongue: My only complaint about it is that you cant jump. Then Portal 2, Skyward Sword, and Arkham City. I have no 5th place.:smallamused:

[Triaxx]

Skyrim. It's just kind of addictive. It seems everytime I think okay, I'll stop and play something else, I get drawn back into it. And it's not because of the storyline, which I don't really find that interesting. Nor is it the combat which isn't that interesting either.

But the variety of characters, and frankly the skill books are often hilarious.

[warty goblin]

But not, generally, of those focused on melee combat. Go and play a Ninja Gaiden game, or Bayonetta, or Devil May Cry, and see how third person melee actually works.

The fact that it uses steering controls and target item under cursor rather than directional control and target item at feet in third person is the greatest indicator that the third person mode is still just a bolt-on useful for vanity shots and little else in Skyrim.

See, my reference for third person melee combat is pretty much Mount and Blade, and my go-to comparison for first person is Dark Messiah. Both are based more fundamentally around careful movement and blocking than chains of attacks, with M&B putting more emphasis on directional movement, block timing and double-time counters while Dark Messiah focuses on precise attack placement since a light attack doubles as a block in many situations. The TES games fit into this sort of 'family', albeit as very poor members thereof since they use a (to my mind) overly abstracted armor system, lack directional blocking and good locational damage.

(In other words, TES games have crippled melee combat because they're RPGs first, melee combat games second).

Also grabbed Steel Armor: Blaze of War on sale. If it's as good as it looks, that could easily end up on my best of year list.

[GloatingSwine]

See, my reference for third person melee combat is pretty much Mount and Blade, and my go-to comparison for first person is Dark Messiah. Both are based more fundamentally around careful movement and blocking than chains of attacks

My point was more the difference in the way your character responds to control inputs. In all the proper third person melee games the direction you press is the direction your character will go, you're controlling them directly rather than steering them. Steering controls do not work nearly as well as direct controls for melee combat.

You could never, for instance, make combat in Mount and Blade that was as demanding on the player as Demons Souls/Dark Souls because it uses steering controls, and they are simply not up to the task.

[Airk]

That's likely all it will ever be in TES game to be honest. I don't even blame them a tiny bit for not adding more functionality to third-person mode, especially in the way you referring to. TES games are MASSIVE. Many times larger then most games in terms of areas to explore and land to travel, so to try to make the game fully playable in TWO different point of views that are complete opposites would probably add an extra year or more onto the games release schedule, and that's really not worth the several extra hundred thousand or so gamers they might attract with that.

I completely disagree with the assertion that this would add years to the development time. It's not as if they have to change ANYTHING about the graphical engine, so all they need is to take a glance at any functional 3PS, and borrow the control mechanisms from there. They don't have to rebalance the game or anything. I'd estimate you're looking at -maybe- a month of additional time spread over the entire project, so long as they play from the beginning to do it that way.

Also, I admit, I'm confused by the fellow who refuses to play Skyward Sword after already admitting that motion controls CAN work for swordplay games by specifically mentioning No More Heroes. And by all reports, the Skyward Sword controls are leaps and bounds better than anything (NMH included) that has gone before. I don't own a Wii and don't have any interest in the Zelda franchise, but this seems like an odd reason to shy away from the game.

Oh, and to stay on topic, my game of the year was Space Pirates and Zombies. (http://www.spacepiratesandzombies.com/) I didn't think they made 'em like that anymore.

[warty goblin]

My point was more the difference in the way your character responds to control inputs. In all the proper third person melee games the direction you press is the direction your character will go, you're controlling them directly rather than steering them. Steering controls do not work nearly as well as direct controls for melee combat.

You could never, for instance, make combat in Mount and Blade that was as demanding on the player as Demons Souls/Dark Souls because it uses steering controls, and they are simply not up to the task.

Oh I don't know about that. Something like M&B lets you move in any direction you want with the touch of a button or two, and by tying the mouse to facing it allows you to easily alter your line of attack or even put your body into a swing.

[Cristo Meyers]

Also, I admit, I'm confused by the fellow who refuses to play Skyward Sword after already admitting that motion controls CAN work for swordplay games by specifically mentioning No More Heroes. And by all reports, the Skyward Sword controls are leaps and bounds better than anything (NMH included) that has gone before. I don't own a Wii and don't have any interest in the Zelda franchise, but this seems like an odd reason to shy away from the game.

No More Heroes = Press "A" to attack. There's almost no using the motion controls for swordplay at all.

That's the exact opposite of what Skyward Sword does.

---

#edit

I may need to revise my list for personal Game of the Year now that I've started LA Noire. It's a lot more fun than I thought it would be.

[Starwulf]

I completely disagree with the assertion that this would add years to the development time. It's not as if they have to change ANYTHING about the graphical engine, so all they need is to take a glance at any functional 3PS, and borrow the control mechanisms from there. They don't have to rebalance the game or anything. I'd estimate you're looking at -maybe- a month of additional time spread over the entire project, so long as they play from the beginning to do it that way.


I will say, I'm no programmer, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you are either, so could anyone with some programming knowledge weigh in on this particular debate? To sum it up: How long would it take to implement a GOOD third-person view combat system for a game like Skyrim?

To add to the debate, I'm not even sure if it would be possible at all, because Skyrim(and all TES games) don't use the typical "you aim, you hit, you connect" bit, you swing, and the game does calculations to see if your offense breaks their defense. You can end up with a lot of misses in a row(this was especially bad in Morrowind, one of the biggest complaints of that game). Most 3-person view games like Bayonetta or DMC and the like don't use offense vs defense calculations, it's "You aim, you hit, you do damage" thing.

[Dogmantra]

To add to the debate, I'm not even sure if it would be possible at all, because Skyrim(and all TES games) don't use the typical "you aim, you hit, you connect" bit, you swing, and the game does calculations to see if your offense breaks their defense. You can end up with a lot of misses in a row(this was especially bad in Morrowind, one of the biggest complaints of that game)

Actually, after Morrowind they dropped that. It used to be that skill affected your chance of hitting and the damage was only based on the weapon. Now it's that your damage is based on both the weapon and your skill, and if you see the blow hit then you hit.